1/       I       lUUUil      I    J 


/zmo 
#3f*f 


TO  THE  PUBLIC. 


When  the  public  mind  h-ifc  been  pre-occupied,  as  it  is 
r.owj  with  matters  of  surpassing  moment,  I  am  fully 
aware  how  difficult  it  is  is  fir  any  one,  let  alone  one  so 
humble  as  myself,  to  obtain  a  hearing  as  to  any  thing  of 
a  personal  nature.  Notwithstanding  this,  I  feel  it  to*  be 
my  duty  to  vindicate  myself  from  unjust  and  slanderous 
aspersions  contained  in  a  publication  made  some  time 
je  and  extensively  circulated  over  the  State.  I  should 
have  done  this  sooner,  but  for  the  delay  in  procuring 
some  evidence  which. I  herewith  publish.  If  in  perform- 
ing this  unpleasant  duty,  I  shall  hold  up  to  the  public 
scorn  and  contempt,  the  base  tricksters,  their  aiders  and 
abettors,  who  have  attempted  to  injure  me  and  others, 
-  will  have  only  themselves  to  thank  for  the  exposure 
of  their  knavery.  At  the  list  session  of  the  Legisla 
a  joint  select^ committee  of  tfhe  two  houses  was  appointed, 
ostensibly,  to  inquire  and  report  "  why  our  soldiers  had 
been  paid  in  Confederate  money' instead  of  State  treasury 
notes."  The  resolution  originated  in  the  Senate.  If  i'; 
ever  passed  the  House  I  was  not  aware  of  it.  It  seems, 
however,  that  I  was  appointed  a  member  of  that  com- 
mittee, though  the  fact  was  unknown  to  me  until  after 
the "  committee  had  had  several  meetings.  Though  a 
regular  attendant  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  atten- 
tive to  all  my  duties,  I  was  so  unfortunate  as  never  to 
have  heard  of  my  appointment  until  informed  by  R.  Y. 
McAden,  a  member  from  the  county  of  Alamance,  that  I 
was  a  member  of  the  committee,  that  he  was  chairman, 
and  that  a  meeting  would  be  held  that  afternoon.  This 
was  shortly  before  the  adjournment  of  the  Legislature  in 
the  latter  part  of  December,  to  meet  again  on  the  19th 
January  following .  How  this  happened  I  cannot  explain . 
It  is  usual  to  announce  from  the  clerk's  desk  the  names 
of  members  of  committees,  when  appointed,  and  also  the 
times  of  their  meetings.    I  knew  nothing  of  either.    I 


repaired  to"  the  place  of  meeting  as  requested  by  McAden 
and  there  found  him  and  Mr.  Warren.  Soon  after  Mr. 
Courts  came  in,  and  then  Mr.  iCllis,  who  was  also  a  mem- 
ber of  the  committee,  on  the  part  of  the  Senate.  The  rest 
of  the  committee,  four  in  number,  as  I  afterwards  learned, 
were  absent.  The  chairman  asked  Mr,  Courts  a  few 
questions,  and  Mr.  Warren  wrote  down  the  answers.  Mr. 
McAden  then  said  "  gentlemen  we  will  adjourn  until 
after  Christmas,  when  we  will  look  into  "this  matter/1 
%  Short  as  the  time  was,  I  thought  I  discovered  a  dispo- 
sition to  criminate  Mr.  Courts,  as  I  believed  for  party- 
purposes,  and  to  furnish  some  excuse  for  his  removal 
from  office,  which  has  already  been  accomplished  ;  and 
then  it  was  that  Mr.  Ellis  and  myself,  upon  our  retiring 
agreed,  as  his  letter  hereto  appended  and  marked  A  will 
show,  that  we  would  endeavpr  to  have  justice  done.  It 
is  not  pretended  that  any  regular  meeting  of  the  Com- 
mittee was  again  called  or  held  before  a  report  was  made, 
though  it  seems  that  the  Chairman  wrote  sundry  letters 
and  collected  such  evidence  as  he  thought  proper  in  the 
meantime.  The  next  I  heard  of  trfe  matter  was  that,'  on 
the  5th  of  February  McAden,  while  the  House  was  in  ses- 
sion, called  me  into  a  room  next  to  the  Commons  Hall, 
where  also  was  Mr.  Henderson,  and  read  his  report  which 
he  asked  us  to  sign.  The  report  contained  matters  which 
I  did  not  know  then  to  be  either  true  or  false  ;  it  crim- 
inated both  Messrs.  Courts  alnd  Lewis,  the  State  paymas- 
ter. I  was  not  willing  to  sign  it  until  I  could,  read  the 
evidence  and  judge  for  myself  with  all  the  facts  before 
me.  That  I  said  so  at  the  time  will  fully  appear  from 
Mr.  Henderson's  letters  hereto  appended  marked  B  and 
C.  I  beg  the  reader  to  bear  in  mind  this  fact,  and  the 
date  of  this  occurrence.  That  night  I  went  to  McAden's 
room  and  asked  him  for  the  report  and  evidence,  that  I 
might  take  them  to  my  room  and  examine  them,  lie  de- 
clined to  permit  me  to  take  the  papers  from  his  room,  but 
again  read  to  .me  the  report,  and  as  that  refered  to 
certain  legal  opinions  of  B.  F.  Moore  and  Thomas  Bragg 
in  relation  to  Mr.  Court's  power  to  sell  bonds  under  the 
Ordinances  of  the  Convention,  and  which  I  expressed  a 
wish  to  read,  he  allowed  me  to  take  them.  But  he  de- 
dlined  to  let  me  have  the  evidence.  The  legal  opinions 
were  not  read  there,  nor  any  other  paper,  ordinance  or 
law,  saving  the  report.  I  still  declined  to  sign  the  report, 
until  I  h  ad  an  opportunity  to  examine  into  the  matter. 


I  was.  in  the  room  but  a  very  few  minutes.  I  am  confi- 
dent of  this,  because  I  had  an  engagement  to  attend  a 
political  meeting  that  evening,  in  the  Commons  Hall,  and 

I  left  as  soon  as  I  could  for  that  purpose  and  was  present 
at  the  meeting  and  acted  as  Secretary.  On  the  next 
morning,  I  read  the  opinions  of  Messrs.  Moore  and  Bragg, 
and  when  I  reached  the  Capitol,  McAden  came  to  me  and 
handed  me  a  letter  from  Mr.  Cunningham,  the  same  pub- 
lished with  the  report,  and  asked  me  to  read  it.  Soon  after, 
he  came  to  my  seat  with  his  report  and  wished  to  know, 

II  what  I  had  concluded  to  plo.  "  I  again  declined  to  sign 
it.  He  seemed  excited,  demanded  of  me  the  opinions  of 
Messrs.  Moore  and  Bragg,  and  Mr.  Cunningham's  letter, 
which  I  handed  to  him,  and  he  then  said  "  I  am  inde- 
pendent of  you,  I  have  again  gotten  Mr.  Henderson  on  the 
report.  "  It  is  proper  for  me  to  say  that  Mr.  Henderson 
had  signed  the  report,  then  taken  his  name  off,  and  then 
again  signed  it.  Mr.  Ellis,  the  only  other  member  of  the 
Committee  who  seemed  to  be  free  from  party  feeling  be- 
ing absent.  (  Thus  it  will  be  seen  that,  on  three  several 
occasions  this  man  McAden  attempted  to  palm  upon  me 
a  one-sided  report,  withholding  from  me  the  facts  which 
he  had  collected,  except  Mr.  Cunningham's  letter,  which 
he  thought  would,  when  taken  alone,  influence  me  to  sign. 
His  purpose  was  to  secure  a  unanimous  report,  and  thus 
deal,  what  he  thought,  would  be  a  crushing  blow  to  Mr. 
Courts.  Foiled  in  this  purpose  we  shall  see  to  what  fur- 
ther dishonest  tricks  and  subterfuges  this  pittiful  petti- 
fogger resorted.  A  few  minutes  after  I  refused  to  sign, 
McAden  made  his  report  to  the  House.  What  was  then 
said  and  done  ?  Let  the  report  of  his  own  political  friend, 
Mr.  Litchford,  in  the  Daily  Progress  of  that  date  answer. 
It  is  as  follows : 

t  "  Mr.  McAden  from  the  Joint  Select  Committee  appointed  to  enquire 
into  ••  the  causes  of  the  payment  of  soldiers'  claims  by  disbursing  officers 
and  agents  of  this  State,  in  Confederate  Treasury  Notes  instead  of  North 
Carolina  Treasury  Notes,  which  were  authorized  to  be  issued  by  the  State 
Convention  for  the  payment  of  such  claims,  "  made  an  extended  report. 

Mr.  Watson  moved  that  the  report  be  ordered  to  be  printed. 

Mr.  Foy  said  that  he  hoped  the  motion  would  not  prevail  at  this  time. 
He  was  a  member  of  the  Committee,  had  not  signed  the  report  for  the 
reason  that  he  had  not  had  sufficient  time  to  examine  into  the  evidence 
on  which  it  was  based.  He  had  met  but  once  with  the  Committee,  and 
that  was  in  December  last.  He  said  that  he  was  not  aware  that  the  Com- 
mittee had  had  more  than  one  meeting.  He  said  that  the  Chairman"  had 
Galled  his  attention  to  this  report  and  read  it  to  him,  but  he  had  declinod 


o  sign  it,  for  the  reason  that  he  had  not  examined  the  papers  and  evidence 
upon  yvhich  it  was  made.  He  therefore  hoped  that  the  House  would  not 
order  the  report  to  be  printed  until  he  had  time  to  write  out  a  minority  re- 
port, that  they  might  be  printed  together. 

,  Mr.  McAden  said  that  the  Committee  was  in  no  way  responsible  for  the 
non-attendance  of  the  gentleman  from  Onslow  (Mr.  Foy,)  upon  the  meet- 
ing of  the  Committee.  The  Committee  had  met  some  five  or  six  times, 
and  on  each  occasion,  notice  of  the  meetings  had  been  read  at  the  Clerk's 
desk.  Every  member  of  the  Committee  in  the  city,  had  signed  the  report 
but  the  gentleman.  He  had  read  the  report  to  the  gentleman  yesterday, 
and  last  evening  in  his  (Mr.  McA's)  room,  and  he  understood  the  gentle- 
man to  say,  that  he  thought  the  report  correct,  but  declined  to  sign  it. — 
Nothing  was  9aid  to  him  by  the  gentleman  of  any  intention  to  bring  in  a 
minority  report,  and  no  request  was  made  for  the  report  or  papers  for  any 
such  purpose. 

Mr.  Shepherd  moved  that  the  matter  be  laid  on  the  table  until  to-mor- 
row 11  o'clock,  to  allow  Mr.  Foy  time  to  examine  the  papers  and  report, 
with  the  view  of  making  a  minority  report.  Upon  this  motion  a  running 
discussion  ensued.     The  House  agreed  to  the  motion." 

This  report  of  what  I  then  said,  sustains  me  in  the 
statement  of  facts  I  have  made  herein.    And  now  as  to 
Mc Aden's  reply.     Does  it  contradict  me  in  a  single  ma- 
terial particular  ?    He  admits  I  attended  but  one  meet- 
ing of  the  Committee.     He  says  there  were  several  meet- 
ings, and  that  publie  notice  was  given.     It  is  only  ma- 
terial to  my  defence  to  say  that  I  knew  nothing  of  them, 
and  that  I  do  not  believe  that  such  notices  were  given. 
He  says  he  read  his  report  to  me,  but  he  does  not  pretend 
that  he  read  to  me  the  evidence  or  suffered  me  to  see  it, 
or  that  any  other  paper  or  document  touching  the  mat- 
ter was  read  at  his  room,  or  at  either  of  the  times  when 
he  read  his  report.     He  represents  me  as  saying  that  I 
thought  the  report  correct,  but  that  I  declined  to  sign  it. 
How  silly  this  is — what  I  dids&y  in  his  room,  referring 
to  that  part  of  his  report  concerning  Major  Lewis,  was 
this  :  "Do  you  suppose  he  has  speculated  with  the  pub- 
lic funds?"     "He  replied  that  it  seemed  that  he  had." 
And  then  I  said,  "if  that  was  so  he  ought  to  be  cashiered." 
Of  course  this  was  conditional  only,  and  based  upon  what 
McAden  had  said  and  which  was  found  by  me  afterwards 
to  be  untrue.     Mr.  Henderson's  letter  shows  however 
that  I  said   in  the  presence  of  McAden  the  day  before, 
that  I  would  not  sign  the  report  without  an  examination 
of  the  evidence.     Again,  McAden  says  that  I  declared  no 
intention  to  bring  in  a  minority  report.     Was  it  necessa- 
ry or  material.that  I  should  have  so  stated  ?    That,  in 
fact,  depended  upon  the  opinion  I  might  form  upon  an 


examination  of  all  the  papers.  It  is  perfectly  evident 
that  there  was  a  design  to  keep  these  out  of  sight,  and  I 
never  did  get  sight  of  them  until  the  House  ordered  them  , 
to  be  placed  in  my  possession,  despite  the  strenuous  and 
shameful  efforts  to  the  contrary  of  McAden,  aided  and 
assisted  from  the  outset,  as  the  Progress  report  shows,  by 
his  man  Friday  (Watson,)  who  stood  ready  to  serve  him. 
then  and  also  the  next  day,  as  the  sequel  will  show  in  con- 
junction with  another,  as  a  swift  and  unscrupulous  wit- 
ness. On  the  next  morning,  being  the  7th,  I  was  ready 
to  make  a  minority  report.  '  At  his  request  it  was  shown 
to  McAden  before  it  was  read  in  the  House.  I  was  soon 
after  informed  by  Harrison,  one  of  McAden's  witnesses, 
that  they  had  "shot  and  shell  prepared  for  me."  When 
my  report  was  read,  McAden  caused  to  be  read  the  fol- 
lowing, purporting  to  be  a  letter  from  Watson  and  Har- 
rison : 

"Raleigh,  N.  G.,  Feb.  6, 1863. 
R.  Y.  McAden,  Esq..    „ 

Dear  Sir  : — A3  we  hare  been  requested  by  you  to  state  what  occurred 
between  yourself  and  Mr.  Foy  last  night,  we  take  pleasure  in  doing  so. 
Mr.  Foy  came  to  our  room  about  eight  oclock.  He  said  he  came  for 
the  purpose  of  examining  the  report  relative  to  the  Treasurer  and  other 
disbursing  agents,  and  wished  to  take  the  report  to  his  room.  Mr.  McAden 
preferred  that  the  report  should  ^be  examined  there;  to  which  Mr.  Foy 
did  not  object.  The  report  was  handed  to  Mr.  Foy.  He  carefully  read 
it  over,  and  they  compared  it  with  the  various  ordinances  of  the  Conven- 
tion, and  the  evidence  filed  with  fhe  report,  and  commented  on  it.  Mr. 
Foy  then  remarked,  that  he  heartily  concurred  in  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee, and  said  Maj.  Lowis  ought  10  be  turned  out  of  his  office.  To 
which  Mr.  McAden  replied,  that  Maj.  Lewis  had  resigned.  Mr.  Foy  then 
said,  he  did  not  see  anything  wrong  in  the  report,  and  that  he  would  sign 
'  it,  but  first  desired  to  read  the  defence  of  the  Treasurer.  Mr.  McAden 
gave  him*  the  opinions  of  Messrs.  Bragg  and  Moore,  and  stated  that  he 
had  appended  them  to  the  report. 

Mr.  Foy  gave  no  intimation  that  he  was  dissatisfied  in  any  manner  with 
the  report  of  the  committee,  or  that  he  wan  ted.  further  time  for  examina- 
tion, or  of  any  intention  to  file  a  minority  report. 
Yours  truly, 

E.  F.  WATSON, 
SAM'L.  S.  HARRISON, 

It  will  be  seen  that  it  bears  date  the  6th,  but  that  is 
not  the  true  date.  It  was  not  written  until  after  the 
House  met  on  the  Tth,  and  after  McAden  had  read  my 
report,  as  Harrison  admitted  to  me.  This  was  the  "  shot 
and  shell"  with  which  I  was  to  be  killed  off.  Who  pre- 
pared it  ?     Why  no  body  but  McAden  himself.     It  is  in 


6 

his  hand-writing,  as  an  inspection  of  the  paper  will  show, 
and  was  written  by  him  at  his  desk  in  the  Commons  Hall, 
in  other  words,  a  letter  from  himself  to  himself,  and  then 
and  there. signed  by  his  but  too  willing  tools  and  coadju- 
tors. "  The  roice  is  Jacob's  voice,  but  the  hands  are  the 
hands  of  Esau."  Neither  McAden  nor  his  witnesses 
will  dare  deny  either  of  these  facts.  They  are  too  well 
known  to  many  members  of  the  House  for  them  to  do  it. 
This  false  statement  was  intended  to'hold  me  upas  the 
mere  tool  of  others^  and  thus,  as  he  supposed,  break  the 
force  of  the  minority  report.  When  it  was  read,  owing 
to  the  difficulty  of  hearing  in  the  House  of  Commons,  I 
did  not  clearly  understand  its  purport.  An  examination, 
however,  as  soon  as  I  could  get  possession  of  the  paper, 
satisfied  me,  and  I  then  demanded  of  Harrison  a  paper 
retracting  the  statement,  which  he  admitted  to  me 
was  in  several  particulars  unture  ;  but  I  believe  he  was 
prevented  from  signing  it  by  McAden.  Finally  it  was 
said  that  the  majority  and  the  minority  reports  would  be 
published,  and  would  go  out  for  what  they  were  worth, 
and  that  all  matters  of  a  personal  nature  had  as  well  be 
dropped. 

To  this  I  assented,  as  I  did  not  wish  to  keep  alive  any 
such  controversy.  I  should  have  stated  that  I  found  this 
paper,  whieh  was  no  part  of  the  report,  had  been  sent  to 
the  public  printer  to  be  printed  with  the  reports.  Here 
was  another  piece  of  dishonorable  petty  trickery.  I 
brought  the  matter  to  the  attention  of  the  House,  an  d  the 
paper  was  erdered  by  the  House  to  be  withdrawn  from 
the  public  printer,  which  was  done.  After  the  Legisla- 
ture had  finally  adjourned,  I  saw  a  notice  in  the  Standard 
that,  by  request,  would  be  published  a  number  of  the 
majority  and  minority  reports  for  circulation.  I  have  one 
of  them  before  me  now,  and  it  is  the  publication  which 
has  called  from  me  this  paper.  It  purports  to  be  Legis- 
tive  Document,  No.  24.  But  there  is  published  as  a  part 
of  this  public  document,  a  letter  from  Mr.  Hoyt,  as  fur- 
ther testimony,  and  which  was  not  before  the  committee 
so  far  as  I  believe  or  have  heard,  and'  certainly  was  not 
laid  before  the  Legislature  ;  and  also  the  above  quoted 
letter,  signed  by  Watson  and  Harrison,  which  the  House 
had  expressly  ordered  not  to  be  printed  as  a  part  of  the 
Document,  and  yet  this  all  comes  out  as  a  regular  docu- 
ment, printed  by  order  of  the  House.  Could  impudence 
and  fraud  go  further  than  this  ?    For  it  will  be  seen 


before  I  get  through  that,  while  the  perpetrators  of  it 
were  annexing  evidence,  as  they  thought  to  help  out  their 
charges,  there  was  a  large  portion  of  the  evidence  in  the 
hands  of  McAden,  when  he  made  his  report,  which  has 
been  suppressed  and  not  yet  published.  I  charged  this 
upon  him  in  the  House  of  Commons  and  he  did  not  deny 
it.  But  to  return  to  his  witnesses.  They  admit  that  I 
wanted  to  take  the  papers  to  my  room  to  examine  them. 
McAden,.  they  say,  preferred  my  doing  it  there.  That  is, 
he  refused  my  request.  And  Ihen,  it  is  said,  I  carefully 
examined  the  report,  ordnances  and  evidence,  comparing 
the  same,  and  that  I  heartily  concurred  in  the  report. 
Not  one  word  of 'which  is  true  save  that  the  report  was 
read  to  me  by  McAden. 

Did  McAden  pretend  that  this  was  so  when  I  made  my 
statement  in  the  House  of  Commons,  and  which  I   have 
before  given  as  reported  in  the  Progress  together   with 
his   reply?     Where   then   were   his   witnesses?     There 
were  some  five  or  six  Ordinances  of  the  Convention  bear- 
ing on  the   subject,  several  tables  of  figures,  annexed  to 
the  report,  besides  the  evidence   reported,  and  the  long 
written  opinions  of  Messrs.  Bragg  and  Moore,  and  I  now 
say  if  any  one  will  read  them  as  published  he  will  find 
that  it  will  take  him  more  than  one. hour   to  do. so,  let  a 
lone  the  time   required  to  understand  what  he  was  read- 
ing.    I  remained  but  a  few  minutes  and  these  men  know 
the  thing  was  impossible  in  that  time.     But  it  is  said   tcI 
heartily  concured  in  the  report,"  and  said  I  would  sign  it 
but  first  wished  to  read  Mr.  Courts'  defence.     If  I  hearti- 
ly concured  in  the  report  and  intended  to  sign  it,  what  dif- 
ference could   it  make  whether  I  did   so  before  or  after 
reading  Mr.  Courts'   defence  ?     Can  any  reasonable  man 
give  a  sensible  reason   for  such  conduct  ?     I  had  refused 
to  sign  the  report  in  the  morning   as  Mr.  Henderson's 
letter  shows.     I  again  refused  on  the  next  morning  when 
pressed  by  McAden,  and  after  he  had  given  me  Mr.  Cun- 
ningham's letter  to  read.     If  I  had  heartily  concurred  in 
the  report  why  all  this  trouble  on  the  part  of  McAden  ? 
And  if  I  had  the  night  before  carefully  compaired  all  the 
evidence  with  the  report,  and  commented  on  it,  and  then 
heartily  concurred  in  the  report,  why  did  McAden  hand 
me    the  letter  of  Mr.  Cunningham  to  read  in  the  morn- 
ing ?     For   according  to  these   willing  witnesses  I  had 
already  read  it,  commented  on  it,  and   compared  it  with 
the  report.     Such  is  the  tissue  of  falsehood  and  absurdity 


in  which   these  willing  witnesses  have  involved  them- 
selves. 

The  great  mistake  I  made  when  McAden  declined  to 
let  me  have  the  papers,  which  in  all  fainess  and  courtesy 
I  was  entitled  to,  was,  in  remaining  in  their  room  one 
moment  after  that  time.  Had  I  known  them  then,  as  well 
as  I  do  now,  I  never  would  have  placed  myself  in  such  a 
situation,  or  having  done  so  would  have  fled  from  them 
as  from  a  pestilence,  when  I  discovered  my  error.  I  dis- 
miss these  poor  tools  of  McAden  to  the  infamy  which  they 
so  richly  merit.  I  have  referred  herein  to  the  letters  of 
Mr.  Henderson  and  Mr.  Ellis.  I  also  annex  letters  mark- 
ed D  and  E  from  Daniel  L.  Kussel  and  J.  B.  Carpenter, 
also  members  of  the  Committee,  and  all  signers  of  the 
majority  report,  save  Mr.  Ellis.  It  will  be  seen  that  these 
letters  differ  in  some  respects.  Henderson,  Kussel  and  El- 
lis say  they  attended  no  meeting  of  the  Committee,  nor 
knew  of  any  after  December.  I  did  not,  and  therefore 
there  could  have  been  none  that  was  regular,  as  there  was 
no  quorum,  Carpenter  says- however  that,  he  was  pres- 
ent at  one  at  the  second* session,  when  the  Chairman  read 
certain  letters  as  evidence  which  he  had  received  after 
the  adjournment.  Why  were  not  these  letters  submitted 
to  a  full  Committee  ?  Mr.  -JSllis  says  that  but  little  of 
the  evidence,  taken  when  he  was  present,  is  published 
with  the  report,  and  that  Mr.  Richardson's  evidence,  (Mr. 
Court's  chief  clerk)  is  entirely  omitted,  Mr.  Russel  saw 
no  evidence  taken  after  December,  says  he  heard  enough 
to  satisfy  him  before,  and  did  not  read  the  evidence,  and 
knows  that  Mr.  Richardson's  was  not  published,  which 
stated  that  part,  of  tl^e  8  per  cent.  Bonds  issued  to  J.  Gr. 
Williams  &  Co.,  were  for  Treasury  Notes  funded,  while 
Mr.  Williams  said  he  obtained  all  he  got  with  Confede- 
rate money.  Mr.  Henderson  says  he  heard  Mr.  Richard- 
son's evidence,  but  don't  know  why  it  was  not  filed  with 
the  report  and  published.  But  Mr.  Carpenter's  letter  is 
rich  in  this  particular,  and  furnishes  a  clue  to  unravel 
the  mystery.  He  states  that  the  Chairman  read  the  evi- 
dence to  some  of.  the  committee  at  the  Adjourned  Session 
as  already  stated,  and  then  adds  in  reply  to  my  question 
"  I  am  satsfied  that  some  of  the  evidence  ivas  not  published, 
and  the  reason  was  that  it  could  not  possibly  have  any  hear- 
ing on  the  subject ,  to  wit,  letters  stating  that  these  Bonds  had 
been  obtained  by  Treasury  Notes."  Simple  Mr.  Carpen- 
ter.    There  were  deeper  and  longer  heads  on  that  Com- 


mittee  than  yours.  So  that  evidence  was  deliberately  sup- 
pressed, and  they  made  you  believe  that  it  could  not  pos- 
sibly have  any  bearing  on  the  subject.   ■ 

In  the  minority  report,  I  combatted  the  position  oi  the 
majority,  that  all  the  8  per  cent.  Bonds  were  sold  by  Mr. 
Courts,  -whereas  it  was  very  certain  that  a  large  portion 
of  them  had  been  issued  for  Treasury  notes,  under  the 
provisions  of  the  Ordinance  requiring  the  Treasurer  to 
fund  them,  and  about  which  he  had  no  discretion  what- 
ever. I  did  not  then  know  that  the  evidence  on  this 
point  had  been  suppressed  for  the  express  purpose,  as 
now  appears,  of  making  out' a  false  case  against  Mr.. 
Courts. 

And  now  I  ask,  could  anything  have  been  more  infa- 
mous? I  learn  that  not  only  the  evidence  of  Mr.  Rich- 
ardson was  withheld,  but  of  the  following  :  Branch  & 
Son,  Petersberg,  Va.;  T.  W.  Dewey,  Charlotte;  W.  H. 
H.  Tucker,  John  W.  Albertson  and  Geo.  W.  Mordecai, 
Raleigh,  and  Jesse  H.  Lindsay,  Greensboro'. 

I  excuse  Mr.  Carpenter,  in  his  simplicity,  from  any 
blame  in  the  suppression  of  this  testimony. 

Mr.  Henderson  is  an  honorable  man,  who  was  only  too 
careless,  I  think,  in  signing  a  report  without  proper  care 
and  examination.  And  there  may  be  others  entitled  to 
the  same  excuse.  But  what  shall  be  said  for  this  man 
Mr.  McAden,  and  such  as  he  is,  who  seems  to  have  had 
the  chief  management  of  the  matter,  and  whose  vilain- 
ies  towards  Mr.  Courts  and  myself,  I  have  been  compelled 
to  expose  ?  I  charge  him  here  with  deliberately  suppres- 
sing important ,  testimony,  which  every  consideration  of 
justice  and  truth,  and  the  oath  he  had*  taken  as  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Assembly,  required  him  to  introduce.  I 
charge  him  with  preparing  and  procuring  to  be  sign- 
ed a  statement  as  regards  mvself  which  he  knew  to  be 
false,  when  I  had  done  him  no  earthly  injury,  save  to  re- 
fuse to  be  used  by  him  in  his  unholy  purpose,  and  because 
I  had,  in  discharge  of  a  public  duty,  made  a  report  differ- 
ing from  that  made  by  him.  And  lastly,  I  charge  him 
with  adding  to  and  publishing,  as  a  legislative  document, 
what  was  no  part  of  it  when  it  came  from  the  Legisla- 
ture, and  thus  attempting  to  practice  a  fraud  upon  the 
piiblic. 

And  so  I  dismiss  R.  Y.  McAden,     I  confess  that  lean 


10. 

drrd  no  language  adequate  to  express  the  scorn  and  con- 
tempt which  I  feel  for  such  a  creature. 


J.  H.  FOY. 


RlCHLABDS,  ONBLOW   CO.,N.  C, 

May  13,  1863. 


11 


A  PPENDIX. 


Camp  30th  Regiment,  near  ) 

Fredericksburg,  Va.,  March  21,  1863.     j 

J.  H.  Foy,  Esq.:  ■  • 

Dear  Sir:  Your  favor  of  the  12th  inst.  is  just  to  hand.  In  reply  to 
your  several  inquiries,  I  have  to  say  that  on  the  evening  when  yourself, 
McAden,  Warren  and  myself  were  present  on  the  "  Star  Chamber  Com- 
mittee," on  leaving  the  committee  room,  you  remarked  tu  me  that  you 
intended  to  see  Mr.  Courts  have  justice  done  him.  I  replied  that  such 
were  my  intentions.  I  attended  three  or  four  meetings  of  the  committee. 
I  do  not  recollect  which.  I  was  first  notified  that  I  was  a  member  of  the 
committee  by  hearing  the  Speaker  of  the  Senate  announce  my  name  on 
it.  Notice  of  the  first  meeting  that  I  heard  of,  and  suppose  it  the  first 
held,  was  read  out  by  the  Door-keeper.  No  other  public  notice  of  any 
meeting  that  I  ever  heard  of  was  given  ;  certainly  none  was  read  in  the 
Senate.  At  one  of  the  meetings  I  think  we  adjourned  to  meet  at  the  call 
of  the  Chair,  and  some  one  (but  I  have  no  recollection  who)  told  me 
when  the  committee  would  meet  again.  At  the .  time  of  meetiug  the 
time  we  were  to  meet  again  was  agreed  upon.  Our  last  meeting,  or  the 
last  I  attended,  was  several  days  previous  to  *Dur  adjournment  before 
Christmas.  We  then  adjourned  to  meet  again  at  the  call  of  the  Chair. 
That  call,  so  far  as  I  know,  or  have  been  able  to  learn,  has  never  been 
made.  I  heard  all  the  testimony  in  the  case  up  to  the  time  I  have  men- 
tioned or  given  at  the  meetings  I  attended.  It  was  just  related  by  the 
witnesses,  in  a  conversational  style,  except  the  written  statement  of  Mr. 
Lewis ;  but  little  of  it  is  reported  in  the  published  reports  of  the  committee. 
They  have  omitted  to  give  any  of  the  evidence  of  Mr.  Richardson,  Chief , 
Clerk. 

It  was  understood  when  I  was  last  present  with  the  committee,  that 
the  Chairman  would  address  letters  to  a  number  of  gentlemen  said  to 
have  had  monied  transactions  with  the  Treasury  Departments. 

I  have  heard  nothing  more  of  this  celebrated  committee  until  its  dis- 
torted and  senseless  majority  reports  appeared.  My  immediate  return 
to  duty  here,  after  the  Legislature  adjourned,  compelled  me  to  ask  a  few 
days  leave  of  absence  before  the  adjournment.  It  was  during  that  absence 
that  the  report  was  made.  I  look  upon  the  majority  report  as  a  con- 
temptible bateh  of  nonsence,  and  cannot  refrain  from  expressing  the 
opinion  that  bad  the  Legislature  addressed  itself  in  a  calm,  dignified  and 
statesmanlike  manner  to  the  responsible  task  of  providing  for  our  troops, 
taking  care  of  the  suffering  wemen  and  children  at  home,  adopting 
measures  fur  the  development  of  our  resources,  it  would  have  been  en- 


12 

jaged  in  a  more  laudible  and  patriotic  enterprise  than  it  was  in  appoint- 
ing "  Star  Chamber,  Thumb  Screw,  Smelling  Committees"  to  carry  out 
prescriptive  partizan  arrangements,  in  the  removal  of  old,  well-tried  and 
skillful  officials. 

I  have  seen,  the  majority  and  minority  reports,  and  I  do  not  hesitate  to 
give  the  majority  report  an  unqualified  condemnation,  and  to  say  that  in 
my  opinion  there  was  no  evidence  before  the  committee  to  justify  such  a 
report.  I  should  have  cheerfully  signed  the  minority  report  had  I  been 
present.  It  has  my  cordial  approval.  I  believe  I  have  answered  the 
inquiries  in  your  note. 

If  these  patriotic,  Conservative^  committee-making,  political  gentlemen 
have  nothing  to  do  but  amuse  themselves  by  writing  glorifications  of  their 
own  acts,  1  think  it  would  be  well  to  turn  them  over  to  the  enrolling 
officers,  and  send  them  out  here  to  be  amused  with  the  euphonious  ca- 
lence  of  '"hep,  hep,  hep,  with  right-shoulder  shift  arms — double-qrtfck/' 

You  must  excuse  this  scribbling,  as  it  is  a  camp  production. 
I  am  sir,  very  truly,  your  ob't  serv't, 

JOHN  W.  ELLIS. 


B. 

Manson,  April  2d,  1863. 
J.  H.  Foy,  Esq  : 

Sir: — Your  last  letter  is  to  hand  and  tho  contents  noted.  I  will  pro- 
ceed to  answer  your  questions  and  then  give  my  reasons  for  not  wishing 
my  name  handed  round  in  the  public  prints. 

Question  1.  Did  you  ever  hear  the  Speaker  of  the  House  or  any  Clerk 
thereof  announce  who  was  the  Committee  ? 

2d.  Did  you  ever, meet  me  On  the  Committee  ? 

Answer  to  1st.   I  do  not  think  I  ever  did. 

Answer  to  2d.  I  think  I  did  at  the  1st  meeting  of  the  committee.  That 
impression  is  on  my  mind,  and  I  think  it  is  corroborated  by  a  statement  of 
yours  in  your  remarks  in  the  Homse  of  Commons  on  the  occasion  of  your 
asking  for  the  report  and  evidence  in  order  to  examine' them,  which  state- 
ment was  that  you  only  attended  the  first  meeting  of  the  committee,  and 
I  knew  I  was  at  the  first  meeting,  and  also  the  further  circumstance,  which 
you  mention  in  your  last  letter,  that  Mr.  Courts  came  before  the  commit- 
tee and  we  did  nothing.  1  was  present  when  he  came  before  us  at  the  first 
meeting  of  the  committee,  and  he  could  not  furnish  then  the  evidence  the 
committee  wanted  and  they  adjourned  to  another  time,  I  think,  at  which 
time  Mr.  Courts  was  requested  to  be  present.  All  of  these  circumstan- 
ces tend  to  strengthen  the  impression  on  my  mind  that  I  met  you  at  that 
session  of  the  committee.  If  the  committee  met  during  the  adjourned 
session,  except  the  time  to  which  you  allude,  when  the  Chairman  read 
his  report  to  several  of  us,  I  am  not  aware  of  it.   • 

You  misapprehend  my  motives  in  not  wishing  to  appear  in  the  news- 
paper. It  is  not  from  a  fear  of  being  criminated,  and  I  did  not  think  you 
had  any  such  design  at  the  time  I  received  your  letter.  If  you  deem  it  essen- 
tial to  your  defence'  and  insist  on  publishing  extracts  from  what  I  wrote 
you,  I  shall  prefer  your  publishing  the  whole  together  with  this,  though  I 
would  rather  not  have  my  name  handed  round  at  all,  in  the  public  prints. 
But  if  you  think  it  necessary  to  your  vindication  I  will  consent  to  your 
publiphing  the  whole,  ljut  no  extracts. 

Yours  respectfully, 

L.  HENDERSON. 


13 


Manson,  March  21st,  1863. 
J.H.  Fot,  Esq.: 

Dear  Sir  :  Your  letter  of  the  12th  is  to  hand,  and  I  proceed  to  comply 
with  your  requests  as  near  as  I  can,  although  I  cannot  say  that  my  mem- 
ory is  very  accurate. 

In  reply  to  your  first  inquiry' on  the  occasion  of  our  being  called  by  the 
Chairman  iDto  the  Committee  room,  I  think  you  said  you  could  not  sign 
the  report,  as  you  had  not  been  present  at  any  but  the  first  meeting  of 
the  Committee,  but  that  it  seemed  to  you  to  be  right,  but  you  did  not  like 
to  sign  it  without  examining  the  evidence.  I  did  not  hear,  that  I  recollect . 
you  say  it  did  Mr.  Courts  injustice.  The  impression  made  on  my  mind 
Was  that  you  wanted  time  to  look  into  the  matter  before  you  signed  it. 

2.  In  reply  to  your  second  question  I  was  informed  of  my  appointment 
on  the  Committee  by  Mr.  Warren  at  my  seat. 

3.  In  reply  to  quesiton  3d,  I  think  I  must  have  heard  the  first  meeting 
announced,  as  I  have  no  recollection  of  Mr.  Warren  telling  me  when  the 
Committee  would  meet,  at  the  time  he  informed  me  of  my  being  a  mem- 
ber. As  to  the  other  meetings  I  am  unable  to  say  precisely  .how  I  became 
aware  of  their  times  appointed,  whether  we  adjourned  to  a  day  certain)  or 
whether  it  was  announced  from  the  desk.  I  am  under  the  impression, 
however,  that  I  have  heard  it  announced. 

4.  In  reply  to  this,  I  attended  some  thiee  or  four  meetings  of  the  Com- 
mittee, can't  say  positively  who  was  present  each  time.  I  think  I  met 
every  member  at  gome  one  or  other  of  the  meetings. 

5.  In  reply  to  question  5,  the  Committee  did  not  meet  during  the  short 
sessions  that  I  am  aware  of. 

G.  In  reply  to  your  sixth  inquiry  I  do  not  know  whether  I  saw  all  the 
testimony  or  not  as  I  do  not  know  whether  the  Committee  held  any  meet- 
ings from  which  I  was  absent  or  not.  I  saw  all  that  was  given  in  at  the 
meetings  that  I  attended.  I  think  I  read  all  that  was  published  before  it 
was  published,  I  do  not  think  Mr.  Richardson's  testimony  was  published. 
I  heard  that.     The  reason  for  not  publishing  it  I  do  not  know. 

I  saw  sufficient  testimony,  I  thought,  to  warrant  me  in  signing  the  re- 
port, although  its  tone  and  temper  was  rather  more  criminating  than  I 
would  have  proposed,  but  as  no  attempt  was  made  to  fix  corruption  on 
the  Treasurer,  I  did  not  think  I  ought  to  keep  my  name  from  the  report, 
as  it  stated  facts  correctly,  as  far  as  I  could  judge. 

I  write  this  for  your  satisfaction  and  not  for  publication,  as  I  have  a 
very  great  aversion  to  appearing  in  the  newspapers,  and  do  not  wish  you 
to  publish  it  as  I  do  not  think  it  will  have  any  bearing  on  the  matter  one 
way  or  the  other.  Yours,  Respectfully, 

L.  HENDERSON. 


14 


Brunswick  Co.,  March  26,  1863. 
Mb.  J.  H.  Poy: 

Sir  : — Your  letter  of  the  11th '.instant  reached  me  on  the  night  of  the 
16th  and  I  had  made  arrangements  to  leave  at  an  early  hour  next  morn- 
ing for  my  plantation  in  Robeson  county,  and  did  leave  and  only  return- 
ed this  week.  This  is  the  first  opportunity  I  have  had  to  answer.  You 
ask  me  to  state  how  many  meetings  of  the  Committee  relative  to  Ex- 
Treasure  Courts'  State  Bonds,  &c,  I  attended  since  Christmas.  I  sup- 
pose, of  course,  you  mean  the  Joint  Committee  appointed  under  a  joint  res- 
olution, to  enquire  into  the  cause  why  soldiers  were  paid  in  Con- 
federal notes  instead  of  North  Carolina}  Treasury  notes  ?  I  did  not 
attend  any  meeting  after  Christmas,  nor"  do  I  know  that  there  was  any- 
held  after  that  time.     The  meetings  I  attended  took  place  in  December. 

You  ask,  who  of  the  Committee  was  present  when  I  attended  ?  I  b<  - 
leve  all  were  present  except  yourself;  and  I  recollect  Mr.  Courts  seemed 
somewhat  excited,  and  enquired,  where  you  were,  to  which  no  ^answer 
was  given  that  I  recollect  of.  Mr.  Courts  was  present  each  time  I  atten- 
ded the  Committee,,  and  Major  Lewis  was  present  at  one  meeting.  I 
heard  his  statement.  You  wish  to  know  if  I  ever  read  over  all  the  evi- 
dence connected  with  the  report.  I  did  not  read  the  evidence  taken  down 
by  the  committee  at  the  meetings  which  I  did  not  attend.  As  to  all  the 
evidence  being  published  with  the  report  of  the  majority  of  the  committtee, 
as  far  as  I  know,  it  is,  except  the  statement  of  Mr.  Courts'  principal  clerk, 
who  stated  that  J.  G.  Williams  paid,  for  8  per  cent  bonds  in  fundable 
Treasury  notes,  while  Mr.  Williams  himself  states  he  paid  in  common 
currency.  You  ask  how  did  I  know  I  was  a  member  of  the  committee? 
Was  it  announced  publicly  from  the  clerk's  desk  or  did  the  Chairman  in- 
form me  privately  that  I  was  a  member  of  the  committee?  To  which  I 
reply,  that  I  do  not  recollect  who  informed  me  or  in  what  manner  I  vras 
so  informed.  I  did  not  think  there  was  any  secrecy  about  the  meetings 
of  the  committee,  and  took  it  for  granted  that -if  any  member  failed  to  be 
present  it  was  his  own  fault.  I  heard  evidence  enough  before  I  left  Ral- 
eigh, in  December,  and  after  I  returned  in  February,  and  the  report  was 
carefully  read  over  to  me  by  the  Chairman  of  the  committee.  I  was 
satisfied  it  contained  nothing  not  fully  warranted  by  the  testimony  before 
the  committee.  I  therefore  had  no  hesitation  in  signing  the  majority  re- 
port. Respectfully, 

DAN'L.  L.  RUSSELL. 


Island  Ford,  Rutheford  Co.  N.  C  \ 
March  21,  186S.  j 
Mr.  Fot,  Richlands,  N.  C. 

Dear  Sir:  Yours  of  the  11th  inst.,  is  at  hand  and  I  will  endeavor  to 
answer  it  asTully  as  possible. 

I  attended  but  one  meeting  of  the  committee  to  enquire  into  the  causes 
why  soldiers  were  paid  in  Confederate  Treasury  notes,  instead  of  North 
Carolina  Treasury  notes.    During  the  last  Session  of  the  Legislature  the 


time  tbat  I  attended,  I  was  notified  by  one  of  the  committee.     The  com- 
mittee bad  been  notified  by  the  Clerk  publicly  once  or  twice  before  to  ray 
knowledge,  but  I  could  not  attend .       . : 
tended  there  was  a  quorum  I  think. 

I  do  not  now  remember  who  of, the  committee  were  present.    When  I  at- 

I  did  not  read  but  very  little'of  the  evidence.  The  Chairman  read  ;he 
letters  he  had  received  during  the  recess  of  the  session,  and  having  been. 
present  at  nearly  all  the  meetings  the  first  session  I  think  I  heard  all 
the  evidence.  I  an  satisfied  that  some  the  evidence  was  not  published, 
and  the  reason  was  that  it  could  not  possibly  have  any  bearing  on  the 
subject,  to-wit,  letters  stating  that  these  bonds  had  been  obtained  by 
Treasury  Notes. 

The  way  that  I  found  out  that  I  was  a  member  of  the  committee.  H  e 
committee  was  publicly  announced  by  the  clerk. 
I  remain,  very'  respectfully, 

Your  obedient  servant, 

J.  B.  CARPENTER. 

1/  on  any  point  I  have  not  WTote  as  fully  as  you  may  wish,  write  to 
me  again,  and  I  will  take  pleasure  in  doing  the  best  I  can.        J.  B.  0. 

N.  B.~ I  wrote  Mr.  Carpenter  a  second  letter  but  received  no  answer 

J,  H.  F, 


Hollinger  Corp. 
pH  8.5 


